![]() Shared association (empty rhombus) in UML has no specified meaning, which makes it flexible, but if you use it without specifying the meaning, it means nothing. So treat it as yet another modeling concept.Ĥ) Do not use shared association if you don't specify what it means If you want to preserve the brand_name "access", you can add a method that will get you the value, e.g.ģ) The same for location location might have more attributes than a country maybe address, maybe points of contacts, etc. You can easily edit this template using Creately. However it is better to model the brand as a separate entity with a name attribute, rather than having a "brand_name" association, or an enum. Java game by Dinidu Senevirathne Edit this Template Use Creately’s easy online diagram editor to edit this diagram, collaborate with others and export results to multiple image formats. In fact UML doesn't even allow you to specify that, because the "attributes" in enumerations are actually different concepts from attributes in classes.Ī car is manufactured under a brand, which has a name. In our examples below, youll find that each class shape is labeled with its name in the first row, the second row displays each attribute of the class on a separate line, and the third row displays each operation on a separate line. You shouldn't specify an association to an enumeration (the same for primitive types such as String, int, etc.), instead use an attribute.įurthermore you should not the visibility (public, private. ![]() Try to follow Java naming conventions when writing code (so brandName instead of brand_name, etc.) This kind of pseudo concept is just confusing. In your proposed implementation you can notice that you are actually treating Location and Brand as a pseudo-enums either use a class meaningfully, or use an enum. So instead of blindly implementing what is given to you - challenge requirements that are obviously inconsistent.Īpart from the Gearbox not needing a class wrap (use a simple enum), the implementation is correct, however the diagram is not correct to begin with. But in the real world I would sent you back home and have you rework the diagram first.Ĭoming from there, the real answer is: review the UML diagram first. You managed to "correctly" express that input with Java source code. And as explained: your input is inherently flawed. Yes, But for me correctness also implies that the "big picture" works out. Your implementation (except that enum thing) matches the diagram. A car has exactly "one" brand out of a known disjunkt set of possibilities and enums exist to express exactly such situations. There is again "no" point in having a brand "class" that has fields called BMW or Skoda. There is "no" point in wrapping an enum into a class of the same name in Java.Īnd from a "modeling" perspective, I would use enums also for location and brand.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |